As I've been talking with people during this campaign about what is most important in Falls Church, sustainability is on a lot of minds. Is our tax rate sustainable? Is our school building sustainable? Is our city sustainable?
One key question is "Why do you think we need a new school when the current building seems to be educating children very well?" That's a tough one to answer because everyone brings their own perspective to the question. It might help with decision-making if we think about the GMHS building like an old, beloved car.
Have you ever owned an old car? It's served you well, taken you on cross-country trips, gotten you to your first job, through storms, driven carpools. It's familiar, reliable and comfortable, and you know how to park it really well. And, even better, you've paid it off, so there are no monthly payments to squeeze into your budget.
And then the maintenance bills start pouring in. Brakes, sliding door motor, timing belt, transmission, window cracks. The expenses are fast and furious, and to make it fit the budget, you triage which expense is most urgent. You decide that the sliding door isn't top priority, so you let that wait for a while. You know your family is safe in the old car, but after a few big bills you realize that you are paying more to maintain the old car than you would on a new car payment. The mechanic who has been taking care of your car says he will keep finding the parts and maintaining it as long as you need it, so you put the decision off a little longer.
Then there's car capacity. Your car was great for 2 adults and 2 small children, but 2 adults and 3 larger children, plus friends, don't fit as well. A new car will have better gas mileage and more safety features. At some point you hit the breaking point, and decide that as much as you love the old chariot, it's time for a new Ford, so you bite the bullet, and start over again with a larger, new car.
A key point here is that the breaking point is different for each person. Some are willing to keep the old car at all costs, and others decide that $3,000 for the new transmission is the end of the line.
Does it help to think about the state of George Mason High School in the same way? The GMHS building has served our citizens well for 65 years, and piece by piece, the systems are all coming to the end of their expected useful years. The HVAC, the roof, the wiring, the plumbing, all the windows. All are old, and all will keep being repaired as long as they are needed, but a cost-benefit analysis shows that fixing every last thing is not a long-term solution. Repair will get us through a few more years, but sooner or later the cost is going to outweigh the benefit. When do we hit the point that keeping the old school in service is not a sustainable solution?
Every car, every building has an expected lifetime, and George Mason, opened in 1952, renovated and expanded for decades, is at the end of its run.
The FCCPS Facilities team takes admirable care of the building. It is well-maintained, but it is old, and the cost of maintaining it is going to keep increasing every year. There are some big expenses in the near future (like that dreaded transmission replacement), and decision time is here. A new building will allow the community to start from scratch and build in energy efficiencies and take advantage of new technology that will reduce operating expenses. A larger building will fit the increased number of students who are coming.
It has been a tough decision because a new school is so expensive, but then there's this: The cost of renovating GMHS and adding on to accommodate enrollment growth is almost the same as the cost of building new and reducing the cost by using land for commercial development.
So what do you say Falls Church? Are we ready for a new building? I think it is time, and I'm voting YES on the bond referendum. How about you?